Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28579832›Full record

ArticleCancer management and research2017

APF530 versus ondansetron, each in a guideline-recommended three-drug regimen, for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting due to anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide-based highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens: a post hoc subgroup analysis of the Phase III randomized MAGIC trial.

Ian D Schnadig, Richy Agajanian, Christopher Dakhil, Nashat Gabrail, Jeffrey Vacirca, Charles Taylor, Sharon Wilks, Eduardo Braun, Michael C Mosier, Robert B Geller and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer management and research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Recent advances in antiemetics: new formulations of 5HTCancer management and research · 2018
    Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Ian D SchnadigCompass Oncology, US Oncology Research, Tualatin, OR.
Richy AgajanianThe Oncology Institute of Hope and Innovation, Whittier, CA.
Christopher DakhilCancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS.
Nashat GabrailGabrail Cancer Center, Canton, OH.
Jeffrey VacircaNorth Shore Hematology Oncology, East Setauket, NY.
Charles TaylorTulsa Cancer Institute, Tulsa, OK.
Sharon WilksCancer Care Centers of South Texas, San Antonio, TX.
Eduardo BraunMichiana Hematology Oncology, Westville, IN.
Michael C MosierBiostatistics, EMB Statistical Solutions, LLC, Overland Park, KS.
Robert B GellerMedical Affairs, Heron Therapeutics, Inc., San Diego, CA.
Lee SchwartzbergWest Cancer Center, Germantown, TN.
Nicholas VogelzangComprehensive Cancer Centers of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, USA.
Cancer Center of Kansas · USCompass Oncology · USComprehensive Cancer Centers of Nevada · USGabrail Cancer Center · USHematology Oncology Associates · USHeron Therapeutics (United States) · USLaureate Institute for Brain Research · USOncology Institute of Hope and Innovation · USWest Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAPF530, a novel extended-release granisetron injection, was superior to ondansetron in a guideline-recommended three-drug regimen in preventing delayed-phase chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) in the double-blind Phase III Modified Absorption of Granisetron In the prevention of CINV (MAGIC) trial. PATIENTS AND

methodsThis MAGIC post hoc analysis evaluated CINV prevention efficacy and safety of APF530 versus ondansetron, each with fosaprepitant and dexamethasone, in patient subgroup receiving an anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide (AC) regimen. Patients were randomized 1:1 to APF530 500 mg subcutaneously (granisetron 10 mg) or ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg intravenously (IV) (≤16 mg); stratification was by planned cisplatin ≥50 mg/m

resultsAPF530 versus ondansetron regimens achieved numerically better CINV control in delayed and overall (0-120 hours) phases for CR, complete control, total response, rescue medication use, and proportion with no nausea. APF530 trends are consistent with the overall population, although not statistically superior given the underpowered AC subgroup analysis. The APF530 regimen in this population was generally well tolerated, with safety comparable to that of the overall population.

conclusionAPF530 plus fosaprepitant and dexamethasone effectively prevented CINV among patients receiving AC-based HEC, a large subgroup in whom CINV control has traditionally been challenging.

Indexed as

anthracyclineAPF530chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV)cyclophosphamideextended release granisetronhighly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC)

Identifiers

PMID28579832
PMCPMC5446958
OpenAlexW2615139345

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.